I agree. I'm fine with them not really dabbling into FA, but jeez, adding a solid vet here or there for a reasonable deal isn't going to hurt. Rodgers prime is now, complement the current crop with a key FA or 2. Huff signed a very modest deal with Baltimore today, would have been nice to get him for that. He got less than Brad Jones ffs

The only issue I have with how we do things is how much emphasis we put on keeping our own guys. We'll overpay for Jermichael Finley and Brad Jones, but god forbid we overpay any FA from outside of the organisation. It doesn't make any sense.

I agree with not overpaying for FA's, but that should also include our own.

The only issue I have with how we do things is how much emphasis we put on keeping our own guys. We'll overpay for Jermichael Finley and Brad Jones, but god forbid we overpay any FA from outside of the organisation. It doesn't make any sense.

I agree with not overpaying for FA's, but that should also include our own.

The only issue I have with how we do things is how much emphasis we put on keeping our own guys. We'll overpay for Jermichael Finley and Brad Jones, but god forbid we overpay any FA from outside of the organisation. It doesn't make any sense.

I agree with not overpaying for FA's, but that should also include our own.

I agree on Brad Jones, unless Bishop is still hurt and wont be able to go till like week 8 or something. We are currently paying for 3 starting ILB's. I wonder though, if we will see more Psycho packages this year.

With Finley, I am okay with him and his salary. I am a big fan of his, and I think MM said it best this off season that they have been trying to do too many things with him. Simplify Finley's role a little more, and I guarantee, as long as he is healthy, he will get 70+ catches and 900+ yards.

I would like to see Finley be more of an on the line TE, or a split out TE. No more putting him in motion all over the field; we have DJ Williams to do all that motion crap. I fully expect to see more DJ Williams and JMike sets next year. With DJ, JMike, Cobb, Jones, Nelson, and an RB (or you can have another WR instead of an RB and Cobb can be the RB)- this can provide a lot of matchup problems for a defense. You can straight up run, you can run with Cobb, you can motion DJ to create an advantage in the run came, you can play action pretty well, you can throw with a TE blocking or a RB blocking.

We need to get better.
Many teams in the NFC not only closed the gap on us last year, but a handful clearly passed us by.

How's this going to happen, seriously?
Are we going to ask more of Rodgers, now that his #1 WR has been removed?
Prayer doesn't work here.

I just wonder how Teddy thinks we've closed the gap on SF & Sea & Atl by letting the Falcons get Jackson, by us losing Jennings, and keeping the same sorry ass DL & LB's who made Collin Kapernick look like Usain Bolt, and made Adrian Peterson look like..... Jim Brown against a bunch of slow white guys in the 1960's.

Does Teddy really think that his draft picks are going to be so much better, and immediate, than everyone else's?

The problem with keeping Finley is that he is being massively overpaid. I know we lost Jennings and needed to have weapons for Aaron, but that doesn't justify overpaying someone. If we didn't have him, you wouldn't have seen TT go out and give $8M to any other TE on the market.

We could've brought in Martellus Bennett, who's better than Finley, for a cheaper and longer deal. Fred Davis, is better than him. We had the chance to get better than Finley, on a better contract, but instead we choose to go with Jermichael, because he's one of our own...

I live in Dallas and they hated Bennett here for what he did and didn't do.
I remember, because they drafted Bennett before we took J-Mike, talking to folks here in 09, 2010, about it and they were so mad they took Bennett while we stole Finley.

I know Finley has not had the same speed in the past few years as a result of the knee injuries probably. But I'd never trade him for MartyB!

The deal is pending a physical, which Means will take at Packers headquarters Monday. Means is a 5-foot-10, 190-pound cornerback who "caught the Packers' eye" by running a 4.4 forty during a recent workout. He played last season for the Hamilton Tiger Cats of the CFL. Means played his college ball at Houston.

So I went back and was rewatching some Nick Perry film. I'm really hopeful he comes back and has a healthy year, as I think he's got all of the tools you look for in an elite player and he was decent when healthy last year. I'm curious to see if we don't try out a 4 front look this year from time to time with Raji and Pickett in the middle and Perry and Neal on the ends. Something like
Perry - Raji - Pickett - Neal
Jones - Bishop - Matthews
would be a very intriguing look against run-centric attacks. I think Neal and Perry are both more natural 4-3 DEs than 3-4 DE and OLB, respectively, and Raji is probably most ideal as a penetrating 4-3 DT. I also don't see Matthews having any trouble as a 4-3 OLB.

Now, I don't want to switch to a 4-3 but I think it could be a really nice look against teams like the 49ers or Seahawks that really go at you with the run and play action game.

I really hope Mike Neal can continue to develop/stay healthy. With he and Clay, I am envisioning what the 49ers do with the Smith Bros, where they have them stunting all game. I hate to put so much on Mike Neal, but if he is healthy, the Packers D is so much better.

I do agree with Sportsfan on Perry. I just remember watching TE's trying to block him, and he would absolutely destroy them, thus forcing the RB to cut back to the inside. He was natural at setting the edge.

I think with the Packers depth at LB this year (assuming we draft another OLB) we will see more of the Psycho package.

That 4-3 defense you drew up is just our 3-4 base defense with everyone playing out of position...

I agree that i'd like to see us in our base defense more, but I don't see the point of bringing the 4-3 into it.

I suppose it's not worth the extra practice and such but I feel like it's a more ideal set against the run than the 3-4. I could see Raji being much more of a force if he wasn't getting double-teamed/could use his quickness more in 1 on 1 situations against guards. Plus, like I said, I think it gives you better results from Perry and Neal. And really, what about being a 4-3 OLB doesn't maximize Claymaker's talents? Use him like Von Miller and you're really doing just that.

Like I said, just an idea for a change of pace scheme to show against run heavy looks.

But yeah, probably not worth it overall. Definitely would like to see us use our base 3-4 more. Anyone have the numbers from last year on what % of the time we went base 3-4 versus the 2-4-5 we like to use?